WELCOME TO LECTURE 6

Quality Function Deployment QFD
House of Quality (HOQ)

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 1 of 27

COURSE PERT CHART

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 2 of 27

Where we are
• • • • • We have seen how to define the problem We have seen how to decompose it We have seen how to be creative We have seen how to evaluate solutions Now how can we improve on existing products? - What does the CUSTOMER want?

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 3 of 27

QFD:Definition
QFD stands for Quality Function Deployment. Derived from six Chinese/ Japanese characters: 1. Hin shitsu: Qualities, features or attributes 2. Ki no: function 3. Ten kai: deployment QFD:- systematic way for developing products based on the needs of the customer. fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 4 of 27

History of QFD
Originally developed by Yoji Akao of Tokyo in 1966. First implemented at the Kobe Shipyard of Mitsubishi in 1972. Subsequently adopted by Toyota and other Japanese Firms. First QFD Training outside Japan at GM and Ford in 1972. Later by other companies around the world

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 5 of 27

QFD : QUALITY FUNCTION DEVELOPMENT

GOAL:
•Recognize the correlations between the customer requirements and the product characteristics •Identify the product characteristics that affect specific customer requirements •Recognize the correlations within the engineering characteristics fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 6 of 27

QFD : QUALITY FUNCTION DEVELOPMENT Paper by Hauser and Clausing in Harvard Business Review 1988 prompted the introduction of the Japanese House of Quality into US companies. Quality:
• Basic (unspoken, assumed) expected, typical • Performance (spoken) one dimensional, market research results • Excitement (unspoken, the customer does not know s/he wants it) pleasant, surprises or delights customer
Lecture 6. Page 7 of 27

fgeorge@clemson.edu

QFD
# design changes US Japan HOUSE OF QUALITY

Before

After

How/ How

How what
Howmuch

why what/ why

what/How How/ Howmuch

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 8 of 27

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 9 of 27

QFD
House of Quality
++ ++ Goal-Conflicts 9 Engineering
... EC 1 EC 2

Ex.: 1-10

Ex.: 1-10

Characteristics 3

Competition compar. In

Customer

Weights 2

CorrelationMatrix 4

Points Strong relationship Medium relationship Weak relationship 9 3 1

Assessment 5

Targets6 techn. Competition compar. 7
Lecture 6. Page 10 of 27

fgeorge@clemson.edu

customer's view 8

CA 1 CA 2 ...

W1 W2 ...

Attributes 1

EXAMPLE
• Caution: oversimplified! • And only top level considered! • Check publications
E. Characteristics
Engraving ability

Design / Color

Body material

Lead material

Competitor 1

Competitor 2

Our product 5 4 7 3 3 5

Erasor

Easy to erase Writes forever Feels good in hand Will not leak Not easy to lose Cost .....

5 10 5 4 1 5

1 3

9 9 9 9

9

.....

Customer Attributes

3 1 3 1 1

9

3

7 4 6 3 3 7

5 4 4 4 3 6

70 Priority
2

186
1

61
4

62
3

1
5

(ref. von Helbling Management) fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 11 of 27

Goal 7 6 7 6 8 8

QFD Analysis
“Potential for Use of a House of Quality Matrix Technique in Rehabilitation Engineering”

by: Logan, G.D. & Radcliffe, D.F. IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 12 of 27

Goal: Improve wheelchair seating to people with disabilities.

• Acquired customer requirements through interaction with patients, and videotaped sessions. • Case 1: improving controls on wheelchair • Case 2: attaching oxygen tank to wheelchair

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 13 of 27

Case 1 H.O.Q.

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 14 of 27

Paper Conclusions

•Case 1 results:
– H.O.Q. provided accurate results. – Top 3 ranked items lead to a successful product and had considerably higher totals than the remaining engineering features.

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 15 of 27

QFD INTENTIONS
• Cross Functional Teams • Development of a new product , service, or process • Refining an existing product , service, or process • Team fills out a House of Quality • Define the Voice Of the Customer • rows on the left • Define the Performance Measures • columns on the top
• Engineering Characteristics

• Technical Quality Characteristics • Quality Specifications • Functional Requirements • The “Hows”

• Forces creative thinking and continual evaluation of progress

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 16 of 27

Performance Measures Customer Needs

Features and Technologies Performance Measures

Parts Specifications

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Parts Specifications

• Using QFD to “deploy” the VOC throughout the development process • One is not enough

Features and Technologies

Manufacturing Processes

Lecture 6. Page 17 of 27

UNREALISTIC
Performance Measures Customer Needs

Initial HOQ takes 2 - 6 days to complete

Features and Technologies Performance Measures

40 - 60 columns 15 - 20 rows
Parts Specifications

• Eager to get to design • Substitute a design matrix for second house • 80 - 90% of learning occurs in the initial HOQ fgeorge@clemson.edu Features and Technologies

Manufacturing Processes Parts Specifications

Lecture 6. Page 18 of 27

QFD software
• QFD Capture (free evaluation download) • http://www.gsm.mq.edu.au/cmit/ • German, Excel, …

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 19 of 27

The House of Quality
• Construction of the House of Quality (HOQ) is an initial step in launching Quality Functional Deployment (QFD). The HOQ provides a means to recognize correlation among customer requirements, engineering characteristics, part characteristics, process operations, and production requirements. Additionally, the HOQ can be used a tool for comparing existing and potential designs with the competition’s designs. Findings from the HOQ can help groups develop targets and understand priorities and goals throughout the development process. In this exercise, 2 HOQ’s are considered: Voice of the Customer vs. Engineering Characteristics and Engineering Characteristics vs. Part Characteristics. The product at hand is a compressed air handheld pump commonly used for inflating bicycle tires. The first step in building the HOQ’s is to list the requirements and characteristics pertaining to the product. The table below lists the customer requirements, engineering characteristics, and part characteristics for the handheld pump.

• • •

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 20 of 27

Requirements and Characteristics for HOQ
Customer Requirements Ergonomics Easy cartridge loading Easy to store Easy to carry Performance House unpunctured cartridge Inflate road tires Inflate mountain bike tires Accommodate varying cartridge sizes Accommodate threaded or non-threaded cartridges Prevent freezing discharge of CO2 from cartridge Maintenance Readily available replacements Maintenance free Environment Be reusable Be recyclable Be safe in all sporting conditions Cost Competitive in market Engineering Characteristics Minimum trigger force assbly of valve body to container Accessible trigger location Convenient geometry Impact resistance Lightweight Compact construction Volume for 12-25gr cartridge Use of varying cartridge designs Operate in temp range 10F-120F Pressure to inflate 40-110 psi Compressed air retention Adapt to Sxx,Pxx needle valves Offer control of flow Over-pressure protection Part Characterisitics Trigger Lever length Lever stroke Material Cartridge housing Outside diameter Inside diameter Length Mass Interface w/ valve head Material Cartridge Safety Pressure relief Capacity (12-25g) Pressure (40-110 psi) Seal, cartridge to valve Material Nozzle Valve Stem Seat Threaded fitting

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 21 of 27

HOQ1 CRs vs ECs

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 22 of 27

HOQ1 CRs vs ECs

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 23 of 27

HOQ1 ECs vs PCs

fgeorge@clemson.edu

Lecture 6. Page 24 of 27

Conclusion: Summary Value of QFD
Strengthens current development process - Clear targets defined early based on market/business demands - simultaneous focus on product and process technologies - key issues remain visible for prioritizing resource allocation - communication and teamwork are enhanced Desired output efficiently achieved - Products meet customer needs - Products provide a competitive edge fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 25 of 27

Conclusions
• Powerful tool to help you prioritize what to work on. • Powerful tool to allow you to compare your product to the competition’s products and target how to better satisfy the customer • Weakness is lack of scientific basis. More heuristic method proven to help companies fgeorge@clemson.edu Lecture 6. Page 26 of 27

Presentations
• • Provide pertinent facts to busy people Be systematic: Carefully prepare
– Analyze the audience – State your objective – Define your main message and support it
• Introduction • Body • Conclusion

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Watch presentation skills, do not distract Support your material with facts, references- Make sure they are correct Use professional language, no slang, no excessive acronyms Proper grammar, articulation, loudness Variety in pitch, rate, intensity Eye contact Watch for hesitations, filler words Stay on time Use appropriate number of visual aids, and make them good quality Use clear fonts (Arial), large size fonts (readable from back of room) Do not use distracting color Put the name of each presenter at the bottom of the slide REHEARSE!!!!!! You should not have to look back at the screen
Lecture 6. Page 27 of 27

fgeorge@clemson.edu